2016 FEVS Results Employee Engagement Action Planning Presentation

  • Slides: 12
Download presentation
2016 FEVS Results Employee Engagement Action Planning Presentation to the Business and Operations Advisory

2016 FEVS Results Employee Engagement Action Planning Presentation to the Business and Operations Advisory Committee November 30, 2016 Dr. Joanne Tornow

2016 FEVS Results Overview Accolades • NSF recognized for improvement in Employee Engagement and

2016 FEVS Results Overview Accolades • NSF recognized for improvement in Employee Engagement and New IQ in OPM’s government-wide FEVS report • 3 point increase in NSF’s Employee engagement score from 2015 to 73% • 3 point increase in NSF’s New IQ index of diversity and inclusion from 2015 to 65% Benchmarking NSF is third highest among medium and small agencies on Employee Engagement scores (behind OMB’s 78% and NRC’s 74%) 2

2016 FEVS Results Overview • 74% response rate (government-wide 46%) • All item scores

2016 FEVS Results Overview • 74% response rate (government-wide 46%) • All item scores at or above government average except two o My workload is reasonable (NSF = 50%, G-wide = 57%) o Prepared for potential security threats (NSF = 75%, G-wide = 77%) • Most directorate/office index scores at or above OPM’s “strength threshold” of 65% • On-going focus areas: workload, career development, performance management 3

OPM’s FEVS Index Scores by Year 4

OPM’s FEVS Index Scores by Year 4

NSF’s FEVS Index Scores by Year 5

NSF’s FEVS Index Scores by Year 5

2016 FEVS Item-Level Results Overview Greatest Increase 2012 -2016 (64) How satisfied are you

2016 FEVS Item-Level Results Overview Greatest Increase 2012 -2016 (64) How satisfied are you with the information you receive from management on what's going on in your organization? 14. 6 Greatest Decrease 2012 -2016 N/A - No questions had a net decrease over 2012 -2016 N/A Greatest Increase 2015 -2016 (54) My organization's leaders maintain high standards of honesty and integrity. 7. 3 Greatest Decrease 2015 -2016 (14) Physical conditions (for example, noise level, temperature, lighting, cleanliness in the workplace) allow employees to perform their jobs well. -3. 8 Top Five Largest Increases 2012 to 2016 NSF 2012 NSF 2016 ∆ 20122016 (64) How satisfied are you with the information you receive from management on what's going on in your organization? 46. 2% 60. 8% 14. 6 (44) Discussions with my supervisor/team leader about my performance are worthwhile. 59. 1% 72. 7% 13. 6 (19) In my most recent performance appraisal, I understood what I had to do to be rated at different performance levels (for example, Fully Successful, Outstanding). 62. 4% 75. 2% 12. 8 (66) How satisfied are you with the policies and practices of your senior leaders? 40. 1% 52. 4% 12. 3 (15) My performance appraisal is a fair reflection of my performance. 67. 2% 79. 5% 12. 3 6

2016 NSF-Specific Item Results • Relocation (communications and intent to leave) • Inclusive environment

2016 NSF-Specific Item Results • Relocation (communications and intent to leave) • Inclusive environment • Resolving disagreements 7

Comparison of Index Scores Across Perm & Supplemental FEVS Results for 2015 and 2016

Comparison of Index Scores Across Perm & Supplemental FEVS Results for 2015 and 2016 8

Agency Benchmark Results – 2016 100 80 73 72 Index Score 65 70 69

Agency Benchmark Results – 2016 100 80 73 72 Index Score 65 70 69 65 66 61 58 60 63 62 62 55 52 53 56 55 60 40 20 0 OPM Employee Engagement Index OPM Global Satisfaction Index GOV OPM New Inclusion NSF Career NSF Workload Index Quotient (“New IQ”) Development Index NSF Performance Management & Recognition Index Benchmark Group 9

Employee Engagement Model ENGAGEMENT Positive work environment Pride in one’s work or workplace OUTCOMES

Employee Engagement Model ENGAGEMENT Positive work environment Pride in one’s work or workplace OUTCOMES Individual Team Organizational Job Satisfaction Innovation Prospect for future personal or professional growth Satisfaction with leadership Discretionary Effort Performance Productivity Retention Satisfaction with recognition received Opportunity to perform well at work Enhanced Customer Service Adapted from: OPM, Engaging the Federal Workforce: How to Do It and Prove It, and MSBP Report, The Power of Federal Employee Engagement 10

FY 17 Directorate Engagement Action Planning Timeline Start FY 17 Employee Engagement Cycle October

FY 17 Directorate Engagement Action Planning Timeline Start FY 17 Employee Engagement Cycle October Conduct Preparing for Action Planning Briefing (AMG/DLG) Customized Support (options range from handson advising to self-directed guidance/tools) November Share guidance Schedule Action Planning advising meetings Identify desired level of action planning support January-March April-Sept Assess progress, Promising diagnose practices series challenges, and develop FY 17 -19 Action Plans Conduct advising meetings Action plans due 3/31/17 October-December Conduct check-in meetings based on 2017 FEVS 11

Feedback from the Committee • How does NSF continue to maintain its progress in

Feedback from the Committee • How does NSF continue to maintain its progress in the coming year? • How do we avoid complacency? • How do supervisors and managers best engage with employees on the results? 12